Newest Articles

Jun 5, 2026

Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician

Many disputes over physician choice in workers’ compensation arise when an injured worker seeks treatment from a doctor of his or her own choosing. Hayes v. Christian Retirement Homes, Inc.,...

Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician Iowa Supreme Court: Employer Not Bound by Opinion of Its Own Treating Physician
Jun 2, 2026

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity

Court Applies Massachusetts Law to Maine Injury, Rejects Immunity Defense in Multi-State Staffing Arrangement A New Hampshire contractor that likely would have enjoyed workers’ compensation immunity under Maine law lost...

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity
Jun 1, 2026

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions

New York’s Court of Appeals recently affirmed an Appellate Division order blocking defendants in a personal injury action from using a Workers’ Compensation Board causation determination as collateral estoppel, holding...

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions
May 27, 2026

Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment

In a case involving a Nebraska truck driver-farm laborer whose treatment for metastatic cancer was allegedly postponed by complications associated with a compensable hip injury and its resulting treatment, the...

Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
May 2, 2019

Utah Court: Unusual Exertion Required if Claimant Has Preexisting Condition

Court Discusses Important Distinction Between “Legal” and “Medical” Causation Stepping lightly through the difficult mine field of “legal causation,” a Utah appellate court affirmed a decision by the state’s Labor...

Utah Court: Unusual Exertion Required if Claimant Has Preexisting Condition Utah Court: Unusual Exertion Required if Claimant Has Preexisting Condition
May 1, 2019

Assault on NYC Subway Employee Exiting Train Did Not Occur In Course of Employment

Employee Had Clocked Out and Traveled Six Stops Toward His Home Where a New York City subway train cleaner clocked out at the end of his shift, left his assigned...

Assault on NYC Subway Employee Exiting Train Did Not Occur In Course of Employment Assault on NYC Subway Employee Exiting Train Did Not Occur In Course of Employment
Apr 30, 2019

Oregon Court Reiterates that “Susceptible to” Does Not Equate with “Preexisting Condition”

Court Nevertheless Reverses and Remands Board’s Decision That Had Awarded Benefits The Court of Appeals of Oregon recently reiterated that a mere susceptibility or predisposition that does not contribute to...

Oregon Court Reiterates that “Susceptible to” Does Not Equate with “Preexisting Condition” Oregon Court Reiterates that “Susceptible to” Does Not Equate with “Preexisting Condition”
Apr 25, 2019

Home-Based Workers: Beware of Four-Legged “Best Friends”

Recent Decisions Reach Opposite Conclusions in Dog-Tripping Incidents According to a recent report published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, as many as 22 percent of the American labor force...

Home-Based Workers: Beware of Four-Legged “Best Friends” Home-Based Workers: Beware of Four-Legged “Best Friends”
Apr 25, 2019

Rhode Island’s Exclusive Remedy Rule Shields Worker Who Engaged in Dangerous Horseplay

On Tuesday of this week, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island affirmed a determination by a state trial court that granted summary judgment, on exclusive remedy grounds [see R.I. Gen....

Rhode Island’s Exclusive Remedy Rule Shields Worker Who Engaged in Dangerous Horseplay Rhode Island’s Exclusive Remedy Rule Shields Worker Who Engaged in Dangerous Horseplay
Apr 24, 2019

Virginia Police Officer’s Slip and Fall While Trying to Get Out of Pouring Rain is Not Compensable

In an unusual case that illustrates Virginia’s restrictive “arising out of the employment” test, a state appellate court yesterday affirmed the denial of workers’ compensation benefits to a former police...

Virginia Police Officer’s Slip and Fall While Trying to Get Out of Pouring Rain is Not Compensable Virginia Police Officer’s Slip and Fall While Trying to Get Out of Pouring Rain is Not Compensable
Apr 23, 2019

Ohio Employer Not Entitled to Unlimited Medical Release

An Ohio appellate court has refused to require a claimant seeking PTD benefits to deliver a signed, unlimited medical release to the employer [State ex rel. Costco Wholesale Corp. v....

Ohio Employer Not Entitled to Unlimited Medical Release Ohio Employer Not Entitled to Unlimited Medical Release
Apr 23, 2019

Kansas High Court Says Amendment to “Failure to Move Forward” Statute Applies Retroactively

In a second recent case construing the effects of Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-523(f)(1), which, according to the first such case, Glaze v. Williams, 2019 Kan. LEXIS 75 (Apr. 19,...

Kansas High Court Says Amendment to “Failure to Move Forward” Statute Applies Retroactively Kansas High Court Says Amendment to “Failure to Move Forward” Statute Applies Retroactively
Apr 22, 2019

What’s In A Comma?

Divided Kansas Supreme Court Argues Over Workers’ Comp Act’s “Failure to Move Forward” Statute In a divided decision, the Supreme Court of Kansas held that Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-523(f)(1)...

What’s In A Comma? What’s In A Comma?
Apr 22, 2019

Oregon Supreme Court: Minimum Wage Law May Not Be Used to Determine Claimant’s Status as “Worker”

A commercial truck driver, who sustained injuries during an unpaid pre-employment drive test that consisted of an actual delivery for the prospective employer, was not a “worker,” as that term...

Oregon Supreme Court: Minimum Wage Law May Not Be Used to Determine Claimant’s Status as “Worker” Oregon Supreme Court: Minimum Wage Law May Not Be Used to Determine Claimant’s Status as “Worker”
Apr 19, 2019

NY Court Reverses Board’s Decision to Disqualify Claimant From Future Benefits

Court Says Board Mischaracterized Videotape Surveillance Evidence A New York appellate court reversed a decision by the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that disqualified a claimant from receiving future wage replacement...

NY Court Reverses Board’s Decision to Disqualify Claimant From Future Benefits NY Court Reverses Board’s Decision to Disqualify Claimant From Future Benefits
Apr 18, 2019

Missouri Court Affirms Award for Fall in Employer’s Parking Garage

45-Year Employee Did Not Face Similar Risk in Non-Employment Life A Missouri appellate court affirmed a decision by the state’s Labor and Industrial Relations Commission that awarded workers’ compensation benefits...

Missouri Court Affirms Award for Fall in Employer’s Parking Garage Missouri Court Affirms Award for Fall in Employer’s Parking Garage

New Comments

  • ramivou: They hid behind a flawed "reading" of this statute for a decade. I am glad the SC finally put an end to the misconception that it was a "first six months only" filing requirement, rather than an ongoing responsibility.
  • trob: Thanks for the query. New York's going and coming doctrine is similar to that in place in the majority of jurisdictions. That is to say that for employees with a fixed place of work and who are on a relatively consistent work schedule, the commute to and from the residence is outside the course and scope of the employment. Often overlooked is the fact that the employee must generally have a fixed ...
  • ramivou: Is coming and going covered in NY?
  • trob: Excellent question. My thought is that the employer was following what it assumed was the typical practice of seeking to protect its "subrogation" interest in state court; in virtually all jurisdictions, the state trial courts are where subrogation issues are litigated. What differed here, of course, was that it wasn't a standard subrogation case, i.e., the employee's work-related injury wasn't ca...
  • ramivou: Why didn't they file it with the state Commission instead?
  • Thomas A. Robinson: I suspect that ACME could seek contractual indemnity, as you note, either from the staffing agency or its carrier. The goal of the Board or agency generally is to see to the proper award of benefits for compensable injuries. Allowing the "aggrieved" parties to sort it out later is completely consistent with the overall theory of workers' compensation. Many thanks for the comment. Best wishes.
  • Barry Stinson: I wonder if Acme's insurer could seek contractural indemnity from Variety's insurer outside of the WC system.
  • Michael C. Duff: The conceptual distinction is between joint causation and presumptive single causation.
  • Thomas A. Robinson: Sorry, I don't/can't provide legal advice. Best wishes, however.
  • Ken Smith: What can I do when my attorney blows my case with an incomplete RB89